MERGED-->Jesus- Tomb found with body + James Cameron is... - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-26-2007, 07:29 AM   #46
Refugee
 
AussieU2fanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Local Time: 02:23 AM
I thought when Jesus went into heaven after the resurrection, I thought it was body and soul and not just soul.

Seriously, how can somebody ascend into heaven by the soul without involving sci-fi type special effects with spooky transparent ghosts escaping out of his mouth and disappearing into the clouds? Or did he just simply say 'im gonna die now but my spirit n stuff will go into heaven I swears it, wot u callin me a liar?'
How does the Bible explain Jesus's ascention into heaven by the SOUL only, I don't understand.
__________________

__________________
AussieU2fanman is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 07:40 AM   #47
Refugee
 
AussieU2fanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Local Time: 02:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by coemgen


You're right on, Angela. It's factual -- people just don't rise from the dead. It's absured to think it can happen. You're right in using that logic.
With God though, if he is who he is, he and his ways are not something to be grasped by our minds. If there is a God, and he made you and me and breathed life into us, then raising someone from the dead should be pretty easy. You know? That's the line of logic used when talking about God.
Now, the biggest challenge for us as rational people is accepting that the logic and reality of God can enter our logic and reality.
That's where faith comes in. And even then, I would say faith is a form of logic, too. It's acknowledging "Hey, I know I can't explain and understand it all." For instance, to me, it's logical to say God created the Earth and each of us. The evidence I see for this is that there's way too much purpose behind the way things work, the way things work together and the way creation is enjoyed through beauty and love. For me, to say it all just came together on accident take more faith.

I'll shut up now.
Nice post but I prefer of taking the attitude that there is much more beauty in the world when you take a purely scientific understanding and ignore any theological expanation of the universe.
To say that everything is too complicated and therefore God must have done it, so to speak, just comes across as something that strips down the true beauty of everything and leaves us not asking questions and not investigating the unknown and basically in a state of intellectual submission to a supposed greater God, if that makes sense.
I say this universe is infinitely more interesting when God is out of the picture and our minds are geared to explore and understand the unknown through science.
__________________

__________________
AussieU2fanman is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 09:26 AM   #48
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Jeez so I made a joke about James Cameron-yes that means I am so threatened by what he has to say or anything factual or scientific or whatever. Hey guess what, I'm NOT. I would watch his show and anything else, and sorry to disappoint anyone but it wouldn't matter to my faith. I'm just a stupid, gullible fool who believes in Jesus as love and what he did and represented when he was alive, and no matter what exists or doesn't exist in any sort of tomb isn't going to change that for me one iota. Can't and won't. Hey I went to see the DaVinci Code too, it had no effect on me other than it was a pretty bad movie.

This thread is a jumping off point for certain people here and their well known viewpoints I just can't see it as much more than that, sorry-and think what you want of me as a result. Can't be too concerned about that
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 10:06 AM   #49
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 09:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


Weird, even Einstein acknowledged ID. What an idiot.
You have been thuroughly misinformed.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-26-2007, 10:12 AM   #50
War Child
 
Butterscotch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 716
Local Time: 03:53 PM
There's no way he'll ever prove this. But his movie will be a huge success, because so many churches will picket and plan boycotts it will only draw attention to it among people who ordinarily wouldn't have cared.
__________________
Butterscotch is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 10:17 AM   #51
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:53 AM
Quote:
That's where faith comes in. And even then, I would say faith is a form of logic, too. It's acknowledging "Hey, I know I can't explain and understand it all." For instance, to me, it's logical to say God created the Earth and each of us. The evidence I see for this is that there's way too much purpose behind the way things work, the way things work together and the way creation is enjoyed through beauty and love. For me, to say it all just came together on accident take more faith.
Accepting that we may never know something isn't cause to abandon reason. There may be a logic to such an attitude but it isn't one needed to understand the physical world.

The problem is that you need meaning; it only exists because it suits us to, from Platonic ideal forms to creation the world has to be put into a way where the life trancends the material.

To view the world and life as a concequence of physical laws not divine will does not require faith; merely to appreciate the existence of space, time, matter and energy; observable and quantifiable elements.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 11:42 AM   #52
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by coemgen


That's the point MadelynIris made earlier. The first, or earliest documents on the other great historical figures were written much longer after their death. Yet, they're seen as valid and reliable by scholars. The earliest document on Christ was written so much earlier than any one else that it stands out. Even though we're talking 30 years, compared to everyone else there's a sense of urgency felt.

And yes, 30 years seems like forever. However, you have to keep in mind a few things. Times were different. Entire books were often memorized. That was a regular practice for people, especially with religious texts. The other thing is if there were any challenges to the first recorded Gospel, it was still written within the same generation of those alive during the time of Christ's life it records. If there were objections, they would've been made.

Then there's the fact that there were so many -- we're talking a massive amount -- of copies made of the text almost immediately. It dwarfs the number of copies made for anyone else. Something was going on. Again, there's a sense of urgency.


30 years would hardly be admissable in a court of law for eyewitness testimony -- again, the point stands that far, far greater claims are made on the basis of these writings than on the writings of Plato and Aristotle. no one is putting people to death on the basis of what was written in The Republic. it is because of this extraordinary authority people claim the bible gives them -- when it's as suspect as any other historical text -- that both invites rigorous skepticism that ultimately disproves any ability to use the Bible in a literal sense.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 11:46 AM   #53
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
coemgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Black and White Town
Posts: 3,962
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Irvine, just because people misinterpret the Bible to fit their own agenda, especially one that goes against the Bible, that doesn't mean the text is unreliable.
__________________
coemgen is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 11:49 AM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
coemgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Black and White Town
Posts: 3,962
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Accepting that we may never know something isn't cause to abandon reason. There may be a logic to such an attitude but it isn't one needed to understand the physical world.

The problem is that you need meaning; it only exists because it suits us to, from Platonic ideal forms to creation the world has to be put into a way where the life trancends the material.

To view the world and life as a concequence of physical laws not divine will does not require faith; merely to appreciate the existence of space, time, matter and energy; observable and quantifiable elements.
Who said I abandoned reason? Also, one can apreciate the physical laws and the existence of space, time, matter and energy, and still believe God is behind it all.
__________________
coemgen is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 11:51 AM   #55
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by coemgen
Irvine, just because people misinterpret the Bible to fit their own agenda, especially one that goes against the Bible, that doesn't mean the text is unreliable.


but 2,000 years and a generation gap (30 years) between the events and the reporting of the events renders the text unreliable for any sort of literal reading, especially a literal reading that seeks to make sense of the words in, say, the context of 21st century Colorado Springs, rather than 1st century Jerusalem.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 11:53 AM   #56
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
coemgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Black and White Town
Posts: 3,962
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman

Nice post but I prefer of taking the attitude that there is much more beauty in the world when you take a purely scientific understanding and ignore any theological expanation of the universe.
To say that everything is too complicated and therefore God must have done it, so to speak, just comes across as something that strips down the true beauty of everything and leaves us not asking questions and not investigating the unknown and basically in a state of intellectual submission to a supposed greater God, if that makes sense.
I say this universe is infinitely more interesting when God is out of the picture and our minds are geared to explore and understand the unknown through science.
I don't understand why science and God can't coexist. I tend to see science as evidence of God. It could be seen as the study of his handy work. Also, just because I believe in God doesn't mean I'm for dumbing things down, home-schooling my kids and teaching them to write by drawing in the dirt with sticks either.
__________________
coemgen is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 12:00 PM   #57
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
coemgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Black and White Town
Posts: 3,962
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511


but 2,000 years and a generation gap (30 years) between the events and the reporting of the events renders the text unreliable for any sort of literal reading, especially a literal reading that seeks to make sense of the words in, say, the context of 21st century Colorado Springs, rather than 1st century Jerusalem.
I see what you're getting at, and to some degree, you're right. That's why when studying the Bible you have to understand the context and culture in which it was written, who the audience was of the specific book and sometimes even the original language to get the full meaning of a certain word. That doesn't make the Bible unreliable or irrelevant.

And again, having been written in the same generation of those who were alive at the time of Christ makes it more reliable than any historical record of anyone else. If it were recorded in the same amount of time as other documents or even later, then yeah, there should be some concern. However, the fact that it's written much earlier than anyone else says something.
__________________
coemgen is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 12:04 PM   #58
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
coemgen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Black and White Town
Posts: 3,962
Local Time: 10:53 AM
FYI — here's the latest reaction to the documentary.

Quote:

JERUSALEM (AP) -- Archaeologists and clergymen in the Holy Land derided claims in a new documentary produced by the Oscar-winning director James Cameron that contradict major Christian tenets.
"The Lost Tomb of Christ," which the Discovery Channel will run on March 4, argues that 10 ancient ossuaries -- small caskets used to store bones -- discovered in a suburb of Jerusalem in 1980 may have contained the bones of Jesus and his family, according to a press release issued by the Discovery Channel.
One of the caskets even bears the title, "Judah, son of Jesus," hinting that Jesus may have had a son. And the very fact that Jesus had an ossuary would contradict the Christian belief that he was resurrected and ascended to heaven.
Most Christians believe Jesus' body spent three days at the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem's Old City. The burial site identified in Cameron's documentary is in a southern Jerusalem neighborhood nowhere near the church.
In 1996, when the BBC aired a short documentary on the same subject, archaeologists challenged the claims. Amos Kloner, the first archaeologist to examine the site, said the idea fails to hold up by archaeological standards but makes for profitable television.
"They just want to get money for it," Kloner said.
The claims have raised the ire of Christian leaders in the Holy Land.
"The historical, religious and archaeological evidence show that the place where Christ was buried is the Church of the Resurrection," said Attallah Hana, a Greek Orthodox clergyman in Jerusalem. The documentary, he said, "contradicts the religious principles and the historic and spiritual principles that we hold tightly to."
Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film's hypothesis holds little weight.
"I don't think that Christians are going to buy into this," Pfann said. "But skeptics, in general, would like to see something that pokes holes into the story that so many people hold dear."
"How possible is it?" Pfann said. "On a scale of one through 10 -- 10 being completely possible -- it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."
Pfann is even unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's more likely the name "Hanun."
Kloner also said the filmmakers' assertions are false.
"It was an ordinary middle-class Jerusalem burial cave," Kloner said. "The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time."
Archaeologists also balk at the filmmaker's claim that the James Ossuary -- the center of a famous antiquities fraud in Israel -- might have originated from the same cave. In 2005, Israel charged five suspects with forgery in connection with the infamous bone box.
"I don't think the James Ossuary came from the same cave," said Dan Bahat, an archaeologist at Bar-Ilan University. "If it were found there, the man who made the forgery would have taken something better. He would have taken Jesus."
Although the documentary makers claim to have found the tomb of Jesus, the British Broadcasting Corporation beat them to the punch by 11 years.
Osnat Goaz, a spokeswoman for the Israeli government agency responsible for archaeology, declined to comment before the documentary was aired.
__________________
coemgen is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 12:07 PM   #59
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by coemgen


I see what you're getting at, and to some degree, you're right. That's why when studying the Bible you have to understand the context and culture in which it was written, who the audience was of the specific book and sometimes even the original language to get the full meaning of a certain word. That doesn't make the Bible unreliable or irrelevant.

And again, having been written in the same generation of those who were alive at the time of Christ makes it more reliable than any historical record of anyone else. If it were recorded in the same amount of time as other documents or even later, then yeah, there should be some concern. However, the fact that it's written much earlier than anyone else says something.

i've never said irrelevant or unreliable, just errant and unsuitable for literal readings. people demand so much from the text, too much, in my mind. and, bluntly, i'm really suspicious of conservative american christian "bible study." there seems as if there's way, way too much of a politicized agenda one's seeking to validate through biblical "study." and i mean that as a generalized comment.

but this is a side discussion, and it's been had before, so i'm going to step back and let the thread continue on the subject.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-26-2007, 12:15 PM   #60
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,573
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

i've never said irrelevant or unreliable, just errant and unsuitable for literal readings. people demand so much from the text, too much, in my mind. and, bluntly, i'm really suspicious of conservative american christian "bible study." there seems as if there's way, way too much of a politicized agenda one's seeking to validate through biblical "study." and i mean that as a generalized comment.

but this is a side discussion, and it's been had before, so i'm going to step back and let the thread continue on the subject.
Let us also note that there are politicians like Barack Obama who are devout Christians but who also don't seek to codify their every belief into law, saving some of them for private discourse.
__________________

__________________
speedracer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com